Auros (auros) wrote,
Auros
auros

  • Mood:

A rose by any other name...

This is something I've been curious about for a while, and it occurred to me that I have a pool of people to draw on who could help answer. Please feel free to refer friends to this post.

Poll #303264 Gay Marriage versus Universal Civil Unions

Might you want, currently or in the future, to have the option of being part of a marriage/union/whatever that did not consist of one male and one female?

no
10(29.4%)
yes
24(70.6%)

If NO: Would you be upset if the government decided to stop using the term "marriage"? (That is, it would no longer recognize a heterosexual union as a marriage, and would recognize all unions -- straight, gay, poly, whatever -- under some other term.)

no
13(92.9%)
yes
1(7.1%)

If YES: Do you care one way or the other what the government calls the type of union you'd like to have?

no
18(72.0%)
yes
7(28.0%)


I've made the results private, so anyone can answer without concern that somebody else is going to come along and see their answer regarding whether they themselves might want a non-standard union. (I will still see the answers, of course. And I'll edit in some comments on the results in a day or two.)

ETA: I find it fascinating that the people who answered "no" on #1 all said "no" also on #2 -- that is, those who already have access to the rights they want really don't care what name they're granted under. (The one "yes" answer in #2 is somebody who actually answered "yes" on the first question, but then answered both #2 and #3. Naughty human. No quiz biscuit.) Do you guys who are answering "yes" on #3 seriously think it matters that the gov't "legitimizes" the union with the word? What do you think you win from that? The family and friends who will call it a marriage will do so no matter what the gov't calls it, and those who will not call it a marriage will not do so. What do we gain by pushing the semantics issue?
Subscribe
Comments for this post were disabled by the author